Something to consider before downloading...
GULLIVER's original release was in the 4:3 aspect ratio, or nearly square, as is standard-definition television. Most movies produced in the late 1930s were produced in this aspect ratio, which essentially matches that of standard definition TV. Full-frame HD TV is in the wider 16:9.
This release was made "widescreen" by cropping the top and bottom of the image. Thus, less of the original animation art is visible than in any of the standard-definition versions of Fleischer's GILLIVER available online and elsewhere.
The download may technically be "HD", but it eliminates much of the beautiful detail of the art as produced. It's butchered. However, if you prefer HD at all costs without faithfully presenting the source material, this is for you.
Since this is a technical review rather than a review of the film itself, no rating stars are given.
More detail from the web:
But right away, during the opening shipwreck sequence I could tell something was wrong. I pulled out my one-dollar public domain copy to compare — and upon examination here’s what I concluded: #1 The Koch version squeezed the original 1:66 screen ratio to a 1:85 “letterbox” picture. All the picture information is there, but flattened – all the characters are squat, fatter. #2 The Koch restoration removed frames from the animation. The characters move less fluid in the Koch version. This is particularly noticeable in any fast moving action or dancing sequences. Like the Ladd “colorization” shorts, it must have been cheaper to “clean up” less frames, and digitize the movie “on threes” (to keep sync with the soundtrack). #3 The DVNR has softened the picture, particularly blurring the elaborate background paintings.
Let me put it in bold, certain terms: Gulliver’s Travels has been stretched and cropped to fit your 16:9 widescreen display. This is unacceptable under any circumstances. Need proof? Here you go. I took a trip into Photoshop and merged a couple of screen-grabs – one from an old 4:3 public domain copy I downloaded and another from Koch’s 16:9 Blu-ray disc presentation.
In the first image you can clearly see that these two frames don’t line up (I tried to match them by keeping the facial area parallel, having lowered the opacity on the Blu-ray screen-grab to make it slightly see-through). The 16:9 version from Koch has clearly been stretched, despite their claims to the contrary. Note how the faces line up for the most part, but the further you move from them the further from congruent the images become. That stretching has also made the Blu-ray frame slightly more squat. Observe the water line in both images.
This second image sees me distorting the 16:9 of the Blu-ray frame to match the 4:3 of the older release. They line up almost perfectly, with slightly more information on the left side of the screen, less on the right and tons cropped off of the top and bottom of the Blu-ray frame.
Koch claims in their press info that the remaster process was performed,
“…frame-by-frame without stretching characters or losing any image beyond standard vertical safe areas – and the use of proprietary techniques actually enables more picture to be visible on the left and right sides of the frame than ever before”
I cry foul. This is either the press folks completely unaware of what was happening in the lab or an out-and-out untruth. There’s the evidence, staring us in the face in the images above.
"The new disc of Gulliver's Travels blows up, distorts and repositions the original squarish Academy image. It begins with a blowup of the Paramount logo, almost but not quite maintaining a circular shape for the stars around the mountain. A newly-added circle wipe is used to segue to the main titles, which are horizontally distorted to fill the frame.
For most of the rest of the film, the movie is both enlarged and (slightly) horizontally stretched to fill the wider screen shape. The degree of cropping and stretching appears to change from shot to shot. Animated characters' heads now graze the top frame line, while the lower frame line cuts them off at the knees. Marching figures in some shots barely peek over the bottom of the frame. Objects and characters on screen are slightly wider than they should be. "
The bad news is that what was originally a 1.37:1 aspect ratio has been converted to 1.78:1 to accommodate today's widescreen televisions